suit premises is such that it cannot be substantially
satisfied by partial eviction of the defendants' tenants. It is
further contended that the father ... Whether the requirement of the tenant can be
fulfilled by partial eviction?
(vii). Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to the cost of
the suit?
Patna
challenged the non-framing of the issue of partial eviction. Hence,
Patna High Court ... suit premises beyond all
reasonable doubt?
(b). Whether the partial eviction of the tenant would
satisfy the requirement of the plaintiff?
8. Learned counsel
their requirement on the suit
premises which cannot be fulfilled by partial eviction.
2. The case of the plaintiffs is that plaintiff ... plaintiffs have proved that their personal necessity cannot be
satisfied by partial eviction in the suit. This plea of the plaintiffs
has not been contested
bonafide personal requirement of the suit premises.
So far question of partial eviction is concerned, it is quite
apparent that the plaintiff had pleaded that ... nowhere pleaded that requirement of the plaintiff would be
satisfied by partial eviction. The learned trial court held that the
witnesses adduced by the defendant
personal necessity as pleaded and also decided the question of
partial eviction in favour of plaintiff.
3. The case of the plaintiff is that ... defendants evicted from the suit premises?
VI. Whether partial eviction will satisfy the
plaintiff's requirement?
VII. Whether plaintiff is entitled to any other
premise.
8. Further, the case of the plaintiff is that the partial
eviction of the suit premises will not serve the requirement of
the plaintiff ... plaintiff
except the suit premises. So far issue with regard to partial
eviction is concerned, the learned Trial Court has held that the
defendants have
reasonable personal necessity
for the suit premises. The plea for partial eviction was answered
in the negative, as it failed to address the plaintiffs ... plaintiffs have personal
necessity of the suit house and whether partial eviction of
the suit premises will satisfy the requirement of plaintiff?
(viii
hotel and there is a need
of parking area also. Hence, partial Eviction is not sufficient to
fulfill the requirement of the plaintiff. The plaintiff ... personal necessity of the
suit premises is bonafide?
(v). Whether partial eviction will satisfy the plaintiff's
requirement?
(vi). Whether the plaintiff is entitled
need of the suit premises.
10. So far as question of partial eviction is concerned,
it is apparent that plaintiffs had pleaded that they ... other products. The necessity of plaintiffs could
not be satisfied by partial eviction.
11. It is well-settled law that the landlord cannot be
saddled
only 25 ft. X 8 ft. in size hence
its partial eviction cannot satisfy the personal requirement of the
plaintiff. As the defendant had defaulted ... eviction suit and a co-
owner can also sought for eviction on the ground of his personal
necessity.
6. So far, the question of partial
